X-Message-Number: 30476
References: <>
From: Kennita Watson <>
Subject: Re: strategies
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:55:32 -0800

David Stodolsky <> wrote:
> On 12 Feb 2008, at 16:25,  wrote:
>> DSS wrote in part:
>>> a  change in life philosophy seems to be a precondition for
>>> effective promotion of biostasis. A new institutional framework
>>> seems essential, if this is to be  accomplished.
>>
>> Not necessarily. There is a huge disjuncture between what people
>> say, or even what they believe, and what they do.
>
> Exactly one of my major points. We agree on this.
>
>> What they do, often, is just follow
>> the leader, if there is any intrinsic motivation at all.
>
> The question then becomes how to create an institutional arrangement
> that provides the appropriate leadership.
>
>> Most peple, most of the time, want to live. When more life, or a
>> better
>> chance of life, is offered through any means, including medical
>> technology,  some will accept that chance.
>
> The statistical results show that a vast majority of people will never
> expose themselves to the necessary information.
>
Unless instructed to by their leaders.  See
"The Authoritarians", home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/ .
for studies that demonstrate and corroborate this.
>
>> In any case, we in cryonics have no realistic hope in the near  
>> term of
>> changing the worldviews of many people.
>
> In an extensive exchange earlier, I explained that there was a way to
> do this. However, a commitment of funds is needed, if social science
> is to be used to promote cryonics.

How many funds are you talking about?  I contend that
it's at least an order of magnitude, maybe two or
three, more than is currently available.
>
> The results I have presented show that a vast majority of the
> population is excluded by current approaches. If a five to ten fold
> increase in sign-ups isn't something seen as worth investing in, then
> the current organization of the industry and the promotion strategy is
> deficient.

That word "worth" is loaded.  Of course it's worth it,
but the funds to implement it aren't available, and
attempts to implement it with insufficient funds would
waste the funds and drain the organizations.  In that
sense, yes, the industry and strategy are deficient --
in the same way that midgets in the Super Bowl are
deficient.  We can't effectively play the game you're
talking about, so we need to pick another one.
>
> Also, as argued earlier, there is a likelihood that the entire
> industry in the USA could be wiped out at a point were cryonics begins
> to show its force politically. Thus, this type of investment is
> essential, not only to promote cryonics, but also to protect current
> members. If this is the case, then the exclusive focus of research on
> improving suspension is a waste of money: It merely delays the
> destruction of the individual for some years, at a significant cost,
> both financially and in terms of time expenditure.

Much larger industries have been wiped out -- I
think we're best off not to show our force
politically.  The gentle seduction will probably
be much more effective in the long run.  Force
engenders resistance.  People are dying, but panic
won't help.  If we aren't very careful about
sticking our noses into institutional matters, we
will come to the attention of powerful people with
money and power to lose; we'd better have a good
deal for them ready before we do.  Patience.
>
> Finally, opposition to cryonics within the scientific establishment
> continues to be a problem. It is unlikely that the movement can
> achieve widespread credibility as long as this continues.

The good news is that as science advances, scientists
will come on board (except the ones who are
authoritarians in scientists' clothing).

> The approach I suggest improves the situation by first,
> promoting signups, which in itself will accelerate acceptance...

>> What we can do is alleviate some of the
>> practical obstacles, e.g. by making participation more nearly a
>> turnkey
>> proposition. Many prospective members have been deterred or delayed
>> by the
>> complications of sign-up and arrangements. This is where volunteers
>> can  help.
>
> The major practical obstacle is the required funding arrangements. The
> massive complications could also be eliminated by an institutional
> arrangement which doesn't require them at all. That is, instead of
> each individual processing their own sign-up and arrangements, a
> single person does it for hundreds of people at once. This would also
> generate a substantial saving for the cryonics providers.
>
How would this work?  Are you talking about existing
organizations or newly-created ones?  What would be
the main purpose of these organizations?  Why would
anyone join them?  I'm also not seeing how these
organizations would underwrite the funding, how the
non-funding paperwork would be eliminated, or where
"substantial" saving for the cryonics providers would
come from.

Live long and prosper,
Kennita

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=30476